Plenty of commentators have predicted that Republicans will pick up seats in this fall’s midterm elections, but haven’t opined whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing. Then there’s Esquire’s political blogger Charles Pierce, whose gloomy forecast for the midterms is that “the power of the insane party will likely be enhanced.”
In a Tuesday post, Pierce lamented the impact of Republican madness on American foreign policy, stating that in a time of serious problems that include jihadism and Vladimir Putin’s designs on former Soviet republics, “the United States [is] scrambled and paralyzed by the kind of petty vandalism” that the congressional GOP has specialized in since President Obama took office.
“Look at the Middle East,” wrote Pierce. “Look at Russia. Look at the dying countries of west Africa. Has all of that been worth it, just to make a centrist Democratic president unable to govern according to his twice-bestowed mandate? How much death is enough?”
From Pierce’s post (emphasis added):
There may have been worse times for the United States to have a completely dysfunctional political system, but I can't think of one offhand. One of our two major political parties has rendered itself insane, and its antics seem to have unnerved the other political party to the point where everyone involved in the government is jumping at shadows. (The "anonymous administration officials" suddenly popping up all over the place are the giveaway there.) And we are coming into a midterm election in which the power of the insane party will likely be enhanced. The only question remaining is by how much. The "debate" within the insane party seems to be between the wings led by the transparently insincere Rand Paul and the incoherently bellicose Rick Perry…
As regular readers of the blog know, I find the "where's the leadership?" trope, as directed against the current president, to be the worst example of the kind of helium-filled banality produced by our elite political media. As parts of it have made quite plain over the past two decades, the world doesn't necessarily want the United States to call its shots for it. But the world doesn't need the United States scrambled and paralyzed by the kind of petty vandalism that has been practiced since 2009. Look at the Middle East. Look at Russia. Look at the dying countries of west Africa. Has all of that been worth it, just to make a centrist Democratic president unable to govern according to his twice-bestowed mandate? How much death is enough?